Highlights of Pa. judge's ruling in voter ID case

FILE - In this Sept. 26, 2012 file photo People pass the signs telling of the requirement for voters to show an acceptable photo ID to vote as they head into the the Penndot Drivers License Center in Butler, Pa. Some political momentum could be on the line in a judgeís forthcoming ruling on Pennsylvania's tough new voter identification law. Commonwealth Court Judge Robert Simpson is expected to rule Tuesday. Thatís just five weeks before voters decide whether to re-elect President Barack Obama, a Democrat, or replace him with Mitt Romney, a Republican. (AP Photo/Keith Srakocic, File)

A state Commonwealth Court judge on Tuesday determined that the requirement that Pennsylvania voters show a valid photo ID will not be in place for the Nov. 6 presidential election, a victory for opponents of the law.

Here are the major provisions of Judge Robert Simpson's 16-page ruling:

___

— VOTERS WON'T NEED PHOTO ID:

Advertisement

Simpson issued an injunction against provisions of the law that would keep people from voting if they don't have photo identification. Those voters will not be required to follow an alternative procedure in which they would vote by a provisional ballot and then prove their identity to county election officials within six days of the election. Instead, they will vote the same as others.

— THE RULING ONLY EXTENDS TO THE COMING ELECTION:

The legal challenge to the law will continue before Simpson, with a status conference set for Dec. 13 in Harrisburg.

— THE JUDGE SAID THE LAW COULD DISENFRANCHISE SOME VOTERS:

Simpson said that with five weeks to go before the election, some people who would need photo IDs to vote might not get them in time.

— VOTER EDUCATION ABOUT PHOTO ID WILL CONTINUE:

Opponents sought a ban on outreach and educational efforts regarding the need for photo ID. Simpson denied that request.

— ELECTION OFFICIALS MAY STILL ASK FOR ID AT THE POLLS:

As occurred in the spring primary, voters can be asked for photo ID, but if they don't have one, they won't be kept from voting.

— WHAT'S AT STAKE:

Supporters of the law framed it as a means to prevent voter fraud, and a key state House Republican lawmaker predicted it would be critical to helping presidential candidate Mitt Romney win the state. Opponents said it would result in qualified voters being unable to cast ballots that are counted.